Skip to main content

Full text of "Report on the charges made by provincial constable J.E. Keays in a document of resignation addressed to the commissioner, Ontario Provincial Police, Toronto, Ontario, and dated at Belleville, October 30th, 1948"

See other formats


I^CKjVT, ,T» 







A Royal Commission was issued under date of 
January 6th, 1949, pursuant to Chapter 19 of the Revised 
Statutes of Ontario, 1937, 'entitled "The Public Inquiries Act 11 , 
wherein the undersigned was appointed Commissioner and direct- 

"to inquire into and report upon any charge or complaint 
made against any police officer or public official in 
a report made by Provincial Constable J. E. Keays". 

As your Commissioner I have the honour to report 
that I have made the inquiry as directed, and in that respect 
submit to Your Honour the evidence adduced before me, and my 
report and conclusions thereon* 

I have had the assistance of Mr. Clarence P. Hope, K.C., 
as Commission Counsel; Mr© Bryson C« Donnan, K.C. appeared 
personally for and on his own behalf; Mr # Malcolm Robb as 
counsel for Inspector Arthur Page, Sergeant A* J. Stringer, 
Corporal S« Ervine, Constable James Driscoll, Constable G. R. 
Pirdy and Miss M« Dowdell. 


The Commission opened and commenced hearings on 
February 7th, 1949, and after various adjournments made 
necessary to allow your Commissioner to preside at Courts 
in accordance with Circuit lists, concluded on April 11th, 
1949# The hearings occupied twenty-six days, and so far as 
I am aware everyone who it was thought might be able to 
throw light on the subjects relative to the inquiry, were 
subpoenaed and gave testimony* I feel confident that all 
available documents in any way material to the subject- 
matter of the inquiry were produced and made exhibits. 

The transcription of a verbatim shorthand record 
of the oral evidence extended to 4832 pages - a million and 
a quarter words, and 204 exhibits. 

At the conclusion of the evidence all counsel and 
Constable J. E, Keays agreed to submit written arguments, 
which arguments, in due course, were received by your 

On or about the 30th day of October, 1948, Constable 
J. £• Keays tendered his resignation to the Commissioner of 
the Ontario Provincial Police at Toronto in a written document 
of seventeen pages and embodied therein allegations, serious 
and searching in character, against certain public officials 
and police officers specifically named therein. 

These allegations or charges made by Constable J. E. 
Keays were against the Attorney-General of Ontario, B. C. Donnan, 
K.C., Crown Attorney for the County of Hastings, William H. 
Stringer, Commissioner of the Provincial Police of the 
Province of Ontario, Inspector Arthur Page, Sergeant A. J. 
Stringer, Corporal Sam Ervine, Constable James Driscoll 
and Constable G. R. Purdy* 


against or referable to the Honourable the Attorney- 
General of Ontario, was that he, the Attorney -General, 
made threats to the effect that if Constable Keays could 
not substantiate his charges of misconduct against senior 
and other officials and members of the Ontario Provincial 
Police Jbrce, he, Constable Keays, would be dismissed from 
the Service • 

I find that no threats were made or intended. The 
Attorney-General did place himself on record to the effect 
that if Constable J". E. Keays failed to establish the formal 
charges which he made he, the Attorney-General, would have 
no alternative but to revoke his appointment as a member 
, of the Ontario Provincial Police. Clearly, under the then 
prevailing circumstances, this was the only action open 
to the Attorney-General in the proper execution of his duty. 

Concerning Bryson G, Donnan. LC>, Crown Attorney 
for the County of Hastings* 

The charges against Crown Attorney Donnan fall 
under three headings: 

(1) General fraud on the public arising out of the Crown 
Attorney's activities as solicitor for one Ernest M. 

(2) Interference by the said Grown Attorney in almost every 
case investigated by Constable J. E. Keays. 

(3) Crown Attorney Donnan was a confirmed drunkard, and was 
intoxicated during the trial of one Turner, on a criminal 

With respect to No. 1, I find as a fact that Crown 
Attorney Donnan was instrumental in sending some people, in- 
cluding members of his own family, to be treated by Carefoot, 
well -knowing that Carefoot did not have a licence to practise 

Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2011 with funding from 

Ontario Council of University Libraries 


medicine in the Province of Ontario. (There is no evidence to 
the effect that Carefoot was practising medicine, if he did so 
practise, for gain )* 

In these premises I am of opinion that the action of 
Crown Attorney Donnan was imprudent and unfortunate, but under 
the circumstances not seriously open to censure. Pursuant to 
the terms of employment under which the Grown Attorney for 
Hastings County is engaged, he, the Crown Attorney, may, in 
addition to his Crown duties, carry on practice in all fields 
of legal endeavour other than criminal law. On this bases 
B. C. Donnan, K.C., as senior partner in the law firm of Donnan 
& Butler, incorporated a company for the said Ernest M* Carefoot 
known as Belleville Aqua Vitae Company Limited* He, B. C. Donnan, 
or his firm, received in payment therefor five thousand shares of 
this company* Not one share of this stock was at any time sold 
to the public* This stock was and is worthless* The product 
Aqua Vitae was sold to the public for twenty-five cents a gallon 
and finally at one dollar a gallon* The venture was unsuccessful 
and after a short period of operation, experimental in character, 
the product failed to commend itself to the public and thereafter 
operations were discontinued* 

The evidence reveals no wrong-doing on the part of the 
firm of which B* C. Donnan, K.C, was a member, in its legal 
services to this limited company. If a fraud were perpetrated 
or attempted on the public, there is no evidence which connects 
B. C* Donnan, K.C. therewith. 

With respect to charge No» 2, namely, that the Crown 
Attorney interfered in almost every case investigated by 
Constable J". E. Keays, there is no basis in evidence accepted 
by your Commissioner for this allegation. My finding is that 
the charges under this heading have no foundation in fact and 
remain wholly unsupported* 

• J 


The text of the resignation of Constable Keays 
containing such allegations or charges, was filed as 
Exhibit 1 in the course of the inquiry, and appears as 
Appendix "A" to this my report. 

Constable J. E. Soubliere was appointed a Police 
Constable of the Ontario Provincial Police on August 1st, 
1937 and was posted to Perth District Headquarters on 
August 3rd, 1937. On June 15th, 1938 this constable was 
transferred to Alexandria and on August 1st, 1939 to 
Ottawa. On July 1st, 1940 he was transferred to Rocfcland 
and on the 1st of February, 1943, he was transferred to 
Perth District Headquarters to take charge of liquor squad 
in that district (No. 9). On March 25th, 1943, Constable 
Soubliere was re-assigned to general duty at Perth District 
Headquarters No* 9« On March 20th, 1944 this constable was 
transferred from Perth District Headquarters to Belleville 
District Headquarters and on the 15th of January, 1948, at 
his own request, he was transferred from Belleville to 
Niagara Falls District Headquarters ♦ On April 15th, 1948, 
he, Constable Soubliere, was re-transferred to Belleville, this 
last transfer being as a result of a medical examination 
and recommendation of the Ontario Department of Health. On 
June 25th, 1945, Constable John Ernie Soubliere changed his 
name (under the provisions of "The Change of Name Act*) to 
John Ernest Keays. 


The only allegation made by Constable J. E. Keays 

-4 » 


With respect to charge No. 3, namely, that Crown 
Attorney Donnan is a confirmed drunkard and was intoxicated 
during the trial of one Ralph Turner on a criminal charge, I 
incorporate the evidence of Constable J. E. Keays (page 463 of 
the transcript) which is as follows :- 

••During this trial (Rex v. Ralph Turner) the Crown Attorney 
was in an intoxicated condition. There were six or seven 
witnesses of the ages between 12 and 14 that were left at 
the mercy of defence counsel without the Crown being 
present in Court but out in the hall having his libations** 
Arthur Herman, for thirty-five years a police officer 
in Belleville, who, in 1946, retired with the rank of Deputy 
Chief, testified as follows:- (page 4026 of the transcription). 
•*£♦ You were familiar with the Crown Attorney? 
A* Oh, yes. 

Q. You have known him for some time? 

A* Yes, I knew the one before him and the one before him. 
Q. Now, with reference to Mr. Donnan, is it common knowledge 
to you, or do you know whether Mr. Donnan even appears in 
court in an intoxicated condition? 
A* Oh, yes. 
<t« Pardon? 
A. Oh, yes, oh, yes. 

Q. Is that a common occurrence, to your knowledge? 
A. Oh, yes. 
Q» Pardon? 
A. It occurred occasionally. " 

The evidence of W. S. Lane, Judge of the County Court 
for the County of Prince Edward, who testified in this connection, 
is as follows:- (page 2832 of the transcription). 


"Q,« Judge Lane, I believe that you stated that you have 
presided over the Sessions in Belleville in 1946? 

A» With the exception of two trials which were presided 
over by Judge Reynolds. 

Q # And the indictments were presented by the Crown Attorney 
of Hastings County, Mr* Donnan? 

A* Yes* 

Q« And consisted of several charges of gross indecency? 

A* Against Mr. Turner* 

Q» It has been alleged by Constable Keays that during the 

course of these trials the Crown Attorney was intoxicated 
in courto What do you say about that? 

A* I can say 

MR. KEAYS: To be fair, Mr Commissioner, the Crown Attorney 
went out on his libations. 

THE WITNESS: The Crown Attorney, in my opinion, was not 

intoxicated at any time during these trials. If he had 
been, I would have asked him to remove himself. 

<^» I would expect that because it is known that you do not 

A* That is right , M 

I must decline to accept as absolute, evidence such as that 
of Arthur Herman which presents conclusions (rather than facts from 
which certain conclusions may follow) especially when such con- 
clusions may be based on shadowy inference or unsubstantial conjecture, 
moreover, when such evi dence is in direct conflict with that of the 
Judge who presided at the trial of the criminal action (Rex v» Ralph 
Turner) which action was the basis of the charge of Constable J. E. 


Concerning the Commissioner of Provincial Police 
William Holebrook Stringer: 

In paragraph 55 of Exhibit 1, Constable J. E. Keays charges 
in unequivocal language that W* H» Stringer, Commissioner of 
Provincial Police, made false representations against him to 
the Attorney-General of Ontario, and that the Commissioner 
suppressed evidence referable to the Constable H. H. Dent 
murder case* 

In 1938, before W» H« Stringer was made Commissioner, 
one W« J. Major, President of the Glengarry Liberal Association, 
complained to Major-Gene ral Victor Williams, the then Commissioner, 
that Constable Soubliere was not properly carrying out his duties 
in the vicinity of Alexandria where he, Soubliere, was then stationed. 
An investigation was ordered before Thomas William Cousans , Inspector 
of the district in which Soubliere was operating* Inspector Cousans 1 
finding was that the complaints were not of a substantial character 
and largely without foundation in fact. 

On December 3rd, 1938, Mr* E* A. MoGillivray, Liberal 
Member of the Provincial Parliament for the County of Glengarry, 
wrote to the Attorney-General for Ontario (The Honourable Gordon D. 
Conant, K.C*) concerning Constable Soubliere* This letter, Ex- 
hibit 188, is as follows :- 
"Dear Mr* Conant: 

This will reply to your letter of December 1st, with 
Inspector Cousan f s report attached* 

It is the most natural thing in the world that Constable 
Soubliere* s superior should hasten to his defense and he is to 
be commended for doing so. 

Now let us endeavour to get away from the legal aspect of 
this case and discuss it from a common horse-sense angle* In 
passing, permit me to make this cursory observation: if there 
was more of this unexcelled quality of common horse-sense 

permeating the Ontario police Force it is altogether probable 

-* 4. 



"we wouldn't be having this difficulty now. 

Mr. Major living on a farm in a remote corner 
of the County, seldom comes in contact with the outside 
world; has knowledge of the facts of this case which 
starts and ends at his mail box* I am familiar with only 
one of Mr. Major 1 s complaints that of Mr. D. J. McDonald 1 s, 
Grocer* Mr. McDonald who is a sick man was so rattled 
when he found himself in the clutches of the law that he 
became panicky and pleaded guilty. He hit a soft shoulder, 
ran off the road into the ditch where he turned over. There 
was no other car involved nor was anybody injured as in 
the case of Mr. Clarence McMillan, but no evidence of 
speed* A charge of reckless driving was laid against him, 
which, according to some of the officials of your depart- 
ment is unjust and the wrong interpretation of the Act« I 
did not discuss this particular case with any of them, 
but rather, all other cases in which no other cars were 
involved and no damage done a second party 1 s property. 

However, I was just trying to give you a clear ex- 
planation of what occurred to Mr» McDonald as I know it. 

I am not going to enter into an argument or legal 
technicalities with you or any one employed in your 

The truth of the matter is this; Constable 
Soubliere is an arrogant, swash-buckling police officer, 
one who always has law enforcement on parade, and never 
forgets to strut his authority and v&o thinks nothing of 
travelling on highways and through towns at an excessive 
rate of speed* He also has been known to frequently 
park his car on the wrong side of a street. I know this 
from personal knowledge. 


■ I wish to have it clearly understood and I am 
not personally prejudiced against this man, but rather, 
I have come to his defense on such numerous occasions 
and I have been so busy investigating complaints that 
there were times when I thought I was Mr* Conant or 
General Williams himself* Some of the complaints were 
entirely fabricated while others were only too correct; 
the one about the priest, however, was false - thank 
Heaven for that* 

I have been criticised, scarified and chastised 
on this constable's account. He knows this because I 
have conveyed this information to him in person. 

I repeat I bear Soubliere no malice or grudge, 
and, 1 only hope I say nothing which will smear his 
record as a man. Whatever happens, my worst wish for him 
is that he continues on the Ontario Provincial Police 
Force. However, the people have turned against him due 
to his reprehensible methods and he will never receive 
from them that extent of co-operation which is so essential 
for any officer of tte Law to have, if he ever expects to 
have an infinite measure of success in the enforcement of 
the law* His effectiveness in Glengarry, from now on is null 
and void* He created this situation himself, not you or 
I Mr. Conant* So, in the light of this, Soubliere 1 s 
removal from this particular zone is not only desirable 
but it is inevitable* He might make an excellent officer 
dealing with gangsters in a large city but his haughty 
methods are utterly foreign to the simple minds of 
plebeians from the hinterland. 

I fought the citizens on this problem from the 
Yery first week Soubliere was here, until just a few short 
weeks ago when the last shred of my resistance was cut 


"from its moorings and caught up in the vortex of public 
indignation* I have done what I could for this man* I 
can do no more* 

The Senior Executive of the Liberal Party wanted 
to send a resolution of protest to the Commissioner but 
I quashed it* The business men who maintain this Con- 
stable is driving trade to other centres, threaten to 
circulate a petition through the county in an effort to 
rid the district of him; I counselled against this. 
Prominent residents of the riding were prepared to take 
individual action - I persuaded them not to do so* But, 
now, I can hold them back no longer. You will be treat- 
ing direct with public opinion, from this moment on, if 
you heed not my request* I am simply the voice of the 
people. So do you think in your wisdom, Mr* Conant, we 
should listen to this voice? Or should we turn a deaf ear 
to it? 

Constable Soubliere's immediate predecessor was too 
fond of a soft time - this chap is over zealous - a 
"galloping Cossack*. Is it not possible to have a middle- 
of-the-road-man? We desire law enforcement in Glengarry - 
yes, but, we feel certain the law can be enforced with 
courteous and human understanding, and I am sure we are 

Thanking you for the time you have allotted to the 

reading of this manifesto, I am» 

Yours truly, 

(signed) E. A. MacGillivray 


Member for the County of 

Doubtless this letter is not wholly without merit, but it cannot be 
characterized as exhibiting masterly understatement. 

a * 


On August 1st, 1940, William H. Stringer, Commissioner 
of Provincial Police, wrote to the District Inspector at Perth 
(Cousans) concerning Provincial Constable Soubliere, Exhibit 198, 
of which the following is an extract :- 

"Provincial Constable J. E. Soubliere, 
" It has been drawn to my attention that Provincial 
Constable Soubliere, now stationed at Rockland, is not 
using tact in his handling of the general public in 
that district • 

It is fully appreciated that Constable Soubliere 
is an excellent officer and I would suggest that you 
contact him personally and bring his attention to the 
fact that an over-bearing attitude towards the public 
is not conducive to good criminal investigation and 
I think that if this attitude is corrected it would 
add considerably to Soubliere 1 s success in investiga- 
tions of criminal matters." 

During 1942, Constable Soubliere wrote to Inspector 
Cousans asking to be transferred to the Criminal Investigation 
Branch at Toronto, This application. was forwarded by Inspector 
Cousans to Commissioner of Provincial Police William H. Stringer. 
In January 1943, the then Attorney-General (Honourable G. D. Conant) 
ordered the formation of a liquor squad, and Constable Soubliere 
was chosen as a member of that squad. After attending a school 
of instruction for two weeks, which was held at the Parliament 
Buildings, Toronto, he, Soubliere, was posted to Perth and 
functioned out of that district headquarters covering the entire 
district. After the expiration of six weeks, as a result of 
complaints received by the Department of the Attorney-General, 
Constable Soubliere was taken off the liquor squad and reassigned 
to Perth. In the spring of 1944, Constable Soubliere was trans- 
ferred to Belleville under Inspector Storey, where he appears to 


have done useful work. During this period, no complaints 
concerning Constable Soubliere reached the Commissioner of 
Provincial Police. 

In 1946, Constable J. E. Keays had a period of ill 
health and the Commissioner, after examining various medical 
reports and after a period of sick leave, concluded Keays was 
not able physically to stand the strain of duty in the Criminal 
Investigation Branch, During the year 1946, Staff Inspector 
Creasy, following an inspection of District No, 8 (Belleville) , 
reported an interview with the Crown Attorney of and for the 
County of Hastings. This report, addressed to William H. Stringer, 
Commissioner of Provincial Police, was dated August 23rd, 1946, 
and paragraph 3 of this report, referable to an interview between 
Inspector F. P. Creasy and the Crown Attorney of and for the 
County of Hastings, is as follows :- 

"All the Crown Attorneys were interviewed and they 
reported very favorably on the men in the District 
excepting Colonel B. C. Donnan, K.C. of Belleville. 
His complaint was that Provincial Constable Keays, 
whilst an excellent investigator and an energetic 
officer, would appear to allow his enthusiasm to 
override his good judgment in many cases. He is 
one of the unfortunate type who does not seem to be 
able to get along with any other constables or 
apparently with the Crown Attorneys, and seems to 
undo all his excellent investigation work by causing 
trouble in the District between the men and himself 
and between the Crown Attorneys and himself. The 
Crown Attorney and the District Inspector both requested 
that the man be transferred out of the District as he 
was spoiling the esprit de corps of the Force in general. 
It is unfortunate that a man of his ability should be 
so lacking as to almost become a general nuisance in 


the District." 

In the autumn of 1947, the Commissioner of Provincial 
Police was advised by Sergeant Ervin F. Hartleib that Constable 
Keays reported interference by one Colonel Vandewater referable 
to a charge of drunk driving against one LeRoy Woods. The 
Commissioner of Provincial Police advised Sergeant Hartleib 
to advise Constable Keays that he would not tolerate interference 
by anybody in the carrying out of any investigation by a member 
of the Provincial Police Force, and to continue the investigation, 
submit all his reports to the Crown Attorney, in the usual manner, 
and to assist him if necessary in the handling of the case. 

The Commissioner of Provincial Police, on returning 
to Toronto, instructed Inspector Everett T. Doyle to make a 
thorough investigation of this alleged interference. Para- 
graph 18 of the report of Staff Inspector E. T. Doyle is as 
follows : - 

n I discussed the Woods matter with the County 
Crown Attorney Colonel Donnan and he advised me that 
it was true that Colonel Vanderwater did make repre- 
sentations on behalf of Leroy Woods for the reason 
that Colonel Vanderwater is interested in ex-service 
men and that this particular accused person is an 
ex-serviceman who Is suffering from some sort of 
mental and physical disability. He also advised 
that the charge under Section 285 (4) Criminal Code, 
would be proceeded with and in his opinion there is 
sufficient evidence to convict. He said there was 
no political interference, that representations of 
this kind were common." 

I find as a fact that the discussion between Colonel 
Vandewater and Crown Attorney Donnan referable to Rex v. LeRoy Woods 


has been by the charges of Constable J. E. Keays magnified and 
distorted to a degree totally unwarranted by the facts as adduced 
in evidence before me and quite without justification. 

The investigation of Staff Inspector Doyle revealed the 
functioning of a detachment within district headquarters, which 
occasioned the issuance of a circular (Exhibit 157) by the 
Commissioner of Provincial Police directing a discontinuance 
of such internal organization. 

This report dealt with several other matters which 
have come up in this investigation, including that of Constable 
Gerald Reid Purdy, a new member of the Force, who it appears 
was completely inexperienced and uninformed referable to the 
proper writing of a police report. The inescapable conclusion, 
from a careful reading of Exhibit 156, is to the effect that 
the organization and functioning of the Provincial Police in 
that district at that time was not one hundred per cent. 

In December 1947, Constable J. E. Keays, through his 
District Inspector William Arthur Page, asked for a transfer 
to another district. The Commissioner of Provincial Police, 
anxious to help Keays, decided to send him to Niagara Falls 
under Inspector Christopher F. Airey, concerning whom Constable 
J. E. Keays spoke most highly. This transfer was to be effective 
on January 15th, 1948. On his arrival at Niagara Falls, Constable 
Keays drafted a memorandum, which he addressed to Staff Inspector 
Doyle, dealing with certain aspects of the LeRoy Woods case, to 
which further reference will hereinafter be made. In this 
memorandum Constable Keays, among other matters, charged that 
Corporal Sam Ervine and Constable Purdy had committed perjury. 
After perusal of this memorandum, the Commissioner of Provincial 
Police despatched Staff Inspector Moss to Niagara Falls to make 
a complete and thorough investigation. The circumstances were 


such that, after a searching investigation by Staff Inspector Moss, 
no action in the premises was indicated. In the course of a few 
days thereafter, Inspector Airey phoned Commissioner Stringer 
advising that Constable Keays appeared to be going out of his 
mind. He, Inspector Airey, advised the Commissioner of Provincial 
Police that Constable Keays was crying continuously and failed to 
give any reason for his distress. The Commissioner of Provincial 
Police instructed Constable Airey to treat Constable Keays with 
the utmost kindness and consideration, which instructions were 
duly and thoroughly carried out by Inspector Airey. Shortly 
thereafter, Inspector Airey reported to Commissioner Stringer 
suggesting that Constable Keays be transferred to Peterborough, 
in order to be near his family who were then living in Belleville. 
Commissioner Stringer communicated with Inspector McNeill of 
Peterborough, who indicated that he would not accept Constable Keays 
in his district under any consideration whatsoever. In these 
circumstances, Commissioner Stringer decided to have Constable Keays 
examined by the Department of Health in Toronto. On February 18th, 
1948, this examination was made, and one Dr. A. W. Sturgeon reported 
for the Department of Health as follows :- 

"MEMORANDUM TO:- Deputy Commissioner W. C. Killing, 

Ontario Provincial Police. 

Confirming our telephone conversation of this 
afternoon in respect of Constable J. E. Keays. 

This man, in our opinion, should be granted 
leave-of -absence for a period of at least fourteen 
days. A posting at the end of this period is advised 
somewhere in the area in which his family is living 
and from where he has recently been removed. 

A. W. Sturgeon, M.D., 
For Medical Director. M 


In March 1948, Commissioner Stringer interviewed Constable Keays 
at Niagara Falls. He, Commissioner Stringer, approached this 
interview with the utmost kindness and consideration. Owing to 
the extreme difficulty Constable Keays experienced in getting 
accommodation, his subsistence allowance was continued indefinitely, 
and Constable Keays was urged to try to co-operate with the 
Inspector and the other Police Officers in the district, in a word, 
to start afresh. In April, Commissioner Stringer, pursuant to 
the recommendation of the medical officers ret ransf erred Constable 
Keays to Belleville in order that he should be near his family. 
This transfer became effective on April 15th, 1948. A letter 
marked "confidential** written by the Commissioner of Provincial 
Police to the District Inspector, No. 8 District, Belleville, 
Ontario, referable to this transfer, (Exhibit 194) is as follows :- 
" No, 549 Provincial Constable J. E. Keays 

This is to advise you that Provincial Constable 
J. E. Keays of Niagara Falls District Headquarters 
is transferred to No. 9 District. 

This move is to be made following medical instruc- 
tions from the Department of Health that it is essential 
in Keays* best physical and mental interests to be 
transferred to a locality where his family at present 

It is quite obvious that Keays is unable to secure 
housing accommodation for his family, which is a large 
one, in another district and I feel there is no other 
place where we can post him if we are to carry out the 
Department of Health instructions. 

The transfer will be effective as from 15th April 1948. 
You will post Constable Keays in whatever detachment 
in your district which may be in close proximity to where 


Keays lives. If it is your decision to retain him at 
District Headquarters you will point out to him that 
he is there to obey orders and not to give them. 
Previous investigations by the staff indicate that 
Keays had a habit of ordering other constables about 
and it should be obvious to you, your Sergeant, and 
Corporal that any orders dealing with the administration 
of the Force locally must emanate from yourself or, 
in your absence, from your Sergeant." 
The District Inspector at Belleville strongly objected to 
this transfer. Some short time afterwards, the Commissioner 
of Police for Ontario received a letter from Inspector Page 
indicating that he, Page, intended to prohibit Constable Keays 
from driving automobiles, whereupon Commissioner Stringer 
ordered a correction to the effect that Constable Keays 
should be treated the same as any other constable and should 
not be put under such prohibition at all. Finally, after 
conferences with Inspector Trimble, the Commissioner of Police 
for Ontario directed that Constable Keays, because of his 
knowledge of the Criminal Code and of District No. 8 (Belleville) , 
should be placed in the radio room as a despatcher. This was 
forthwith done. On July 2nd, 1948, the Commissioner of Police 
for Ontario was present at the official opening of the radio 
communication system of District No. 8 (Belleville) . On that 
occasion, Inspector Page advised Commissioner Stringer that 
Constable Keays would like to see the Commissioner in his office 
after the termination of the opening proceedings. Accompanied 
by Inspector Thomas H. Trimble, the Commissioner of Police for 
Ontario went to the office of Inspector Page to interview 
Constable Keays. Commissioner Stringer said to Constable Keays, 
"I understand you would like to speak to me, Constable Keays." 


Constable Keays said, "Yes, I would." Commissioner Stringer: 
"What is it in connection with?" Constable Keays said , "I am 
a discredited officer, I am not permitted to drive cars, I am 
in that radio room, I don't like the work and I want to do 
something else." The Commissioner then said to him, "You 
are doing very good work in this radio room, a short time 
ago you set up a road block in Prince Edward County which 
resulted in the capture of several bandits and I would like 
you to continue in that work and co-operate with us as I know 
you have abilities along that line." Constable Keays said, 
"I don't like this work." The Commissioner of Provincial 
Police then inquired if Constable Keays had anything further 
to say, and Constable Keays replied, "No, nothing else, but 
I still don't like this work and I want to be moved out." 
The Commissioner then pointed out to Constable Keays that 
he must obey lawful orders; that others were doing the 
same thing and were not complaining. The Commissioner 
said, "If you cannot obey our lawful orders I am suggesting 
that you resign from this Force." At this time, according 
to Commissioner Stringer, Constable Keays changed his voice 
into a loud tone and said, "There is going to be an explosion 
around here. There is a letter going to Mr. Oliver about 
this case." The Commissioner of Police said, "Please clarify 
what you are talking about." Constable Keays said, "You will 
hear about it later", and went out of the room. Then, on 
November 3rd, Commissioner Stringer received a copy of Exhibit 1 
from the Deputy Commissioner. The copy received by the 
Commissioner bore an annotation indicating that a copy had 
been sent to the Department of the Attorney -General. 


The evidence establishes conclusively, and I find 
as a fact, that William H. Stringer, the Commissioner of 
Provincial Police, is a most upright, honest and efficient 
executive; that he, the Commissioner, for a period of years 
supported and defended Constable Keays, whom he regarded 
as a police officer of exceptional promise and for whose 
ability and capacity he, the Commissioner, had much respect. 

I further find as a fact that throughout the entire 
service of Constable J. E. Keays with the Provincial Police, 
Constable Keays was shown the greatest kindness and given 
the utmost consideration by Commissioner W. H. Stringer. 
The Commissioner exemplified not only intimate concern 
but tender solicitude for the welfare of this Constable. 
I further find that, until destroyed by the conduct of 
Constable Keays, Commissioner Stringer had unbounded 
confidence in his ability and capacity, and that the 
Commissioner supported and defended Constable Keays 
until defence was hopeless and confidence unsupportable . 
I find as a fact that the allegations in Exhibit 1 to the 
effect that Commissioner W. H. Stringer made false repre- 
sentations to the Honourable the Attorney-General for Ontario 
are wholly without foundation in fact. And I further 
find that the charge that Commissioner W. H. Stringer 
suppressed evidence in the Dent murder inquiry, or any 
aspect thereof, has been in no way established and 
on the evidence is entirely and completely negatived 
and disproven. 


Concerning t he M urder of Pr ovincial Constable H. H. Dent. 

* " *— ' - ■■■■■■- - I - I " ■ I | ■ | l || - ■ !■ I _ I . * 

June 20th. 1940, Sergeant J. A. Stringer, and John Maki : 

On June 20th, 1940, Provincial Constable H. H. Dent, 
of Rockland, was shot and killed at Navan Station by a foreigner, 
whose suspicious actions Constable Dent was investigating, A 
short time later, during flight, this assailant, who was later 
identified as John Maki (a Finlander, of Montreal), was shot 
and killed by Acting Sergeant J, A. Stringer who had pursued 
the murderer and overtook him in a wood a mile or a mile and 
a half distant from Navan Station. Sergeant Stringer, who 
was stationed at Timmins, Ontario, and spending his annual 
leave at Navan, had responded to a general alarm sent out 
following the shooting of Constable Dent. Sergeant Stringer 
hurried to Navan Station and found Constable Dent lying on 
the floor of that building, conscious and composed, but mortally 
wounded and in the agony of approaching death. Constable 
Dent gave Sergeant Stringer a general description of his 
assailant, and gave Stringer his revolver and told Sergeant 
Stringer that he would find a box of ammunition in his, Dent's, 
motor car nearby. Sergeant Stringer, having secured Dent's 
revolver and ammunition, pursued Dent's assailant across a 
field and into an adjacent bush. The assailant, Maki, 
was armed with a .45 calibre Colt automatic pistol, and 
fired at least three shots at Sergeant Stringer. He, Stringer, 
was able to follow the course taken by the assailant Maki 
by the disturbed dew on the vegetation and leaves of the 
underbrush. Sergeant Stringer, with marked coolness, 
courage and determination, stalked the assailant Maki and 
located him standing on a log looking in the general direction 
of Stringer's location. At this time, a shot was fired in 


the direction of Sergeant Stringer by the assailant Maki. 
Stringer dropped and remained motionless for a time, mean- 
while keeping his eye on the assailant Maki who was peering 
in the general direction of where he had seen Stringer. 
Sergeant Stringer shouted to Maki, at which time Maki 
raised his right arm as if about to fire. Sergeant 
Stringer, taking careful aim, fired and shot Maki through 
the head. At that instant, Maki's pistol was also fired. 
Some further shots were fired by Sergeant Stringer in the 
general direction of Maki f s location. 

Following the shooting of Constable Dent, in answer 
to the general alarm to all police forces within the vicinity 
of Navan, a group of constables hurried to that locality from 
Ottawa. Among these constables was Provincial Constable 
J. E. Keays (or P.O. Soubliere, as he then was). With Con- 
stable Keays was detective Stoneraan, of the Ottawa City Police, 
who was in plain clothing. Detective Stoneman and one George 
Sidney Smith, a local farmer at Navan, proceeded into the bush 
toward where Sergeant Stringer and the desperado were supposed 
to be. Constable Keays, who was in uniform and armed, re- 
mained at or near the roadside. Neither Detective Stoneraan 
nor Smith were armed. Detective Stoneman and Smith came to 
the place where Sergeant Stringer was keeping watch, near 
where the assailant Maki had dropped. Stoneman and Stringer 
then moved forward, finding that Sergeant Stringer 1 s shot had 
passed through Maki*s head killing him instantly. After a 
short investigation at the scene of the shooting, Smith re- 
turned to the place where he had left Constable Keays 
(Soubliere) and told Keays, "Come on in. Everything is all 
right. The man is dead." Further investigations were made, 
and subsequently, on the 9th day of JUly, 19A-0, a coroner f s 
jury returned a verdict as follows:- 



"We the jury find that Provincial Constable H. Dent, 
Rockland, was murdered in the Navan Railway Station 
on June 20th. by John Miki, 52 year old Finn, and 
that the shooting of Miki an hour later, in a nearby 
bush, by Sergeant J. A. Stringer was justifiable 
homicide. Further that the death of Constable 
Dent was due to internal hemorrhage caused by two 
bullet wounds in the abdomen, and the death of Miki 
was a result of one shot being fired through the 

Constable J. E. Keays, in his letter of resignation (Exhibit 
1) paragraphs 60, 61 and 62, says as follows :- 

w 60. Unless the Commissioner is of the opinion 
that I caused dissension while stationed at Ottawa, 
by the fact that, during the course of an investigat- 
ion of which I was in charge, a Provincial Constable 
shot and killed a man, and as the result of false 
statements which he released to the press and sub- 
mitted to the authorities, he subsequently had to 
repeat these statements before a Jury in order to 
protect his actions, and placed me in a very pre- 
carious position. 

61. After placing the facts before His Honour Judge 
C. W. A. MARION, the Crown Attorney, and the District 
Inspector, I gave notice before them that if I was 


expected to commit perjury before a Jury in order 
to cover up the officer involved, I would turn in 
my uniform, 

62. The District Inspector communicated with 
the Commissioner who directed that my evidence 
be subdued, and, as a result, another officer had 
to take my place in order to produce certain ex- 
hibits in my possession. In the witness stand, 
this officer was asked the same questions I an- 
ticipated. The Jury was deprived of certain 
evidence, and, the officer involved was promoted. 
It will be noted that 2 weeks later the District 
Inspector apologized to me for his attitude in 
connection with this investigation," 

The charges made by Constable J. E. Keays 
referable to Sergeant Stringer and the H. H. Dent murder 
case, as set forth in Exhibit 1, justly deserve unqualified 
condemnation. The intrepidity, courage, resourcefulness 
and sound judgment of Sergeant Stringer was highly commend- 
able and fully warranted the distinction later awarded him 
for outstanding merit in this daring enterprise. The 
allegations of Constable Keays are completely unsupported 
by reliable evidence — indeed they have been affirmatively 
disproved in their entirety. 

Concerning the Incident of LeRoy Woods : 

About 7.20 P.M. Tuesday, November 4th, 1947, Pro- 
vincial Constable Keays received a telephone call from one, 
Mr. Bruce Pine, alleging that Pine had observed an automobile 


being driven by a person unknown, north on Number 14 Highway 
about three miles north of Belleville, in a manner which in- 
dicated that the driver might be intoxicated. Provincial 
Constable Keays, accompanied by provincial constable G. R. 
purdy, set out in a police car to investigate the complaint. 
The car referred to by Pine in his complaint to Keays was 
found just off the highway in a gateway to the farm of one, 
0. C. Chisholm. It was learned that one LeRoy Woods, 
owned the vehicle in question and was its driver at the 
time that Bruce Pine referred to in his complaint. 

LeRoy woods was placed under arrest by Constable 
Keays and taken to Belleville and placed in the city police 
cells. On November 5th, he was charged with having the 
care or control of an automobile whilst intoxicated, under 
the provisions of section 285 (4) of the Criminal Code, 
and that morning was released on bail. On November 6th, 
a further charge of dangerous driving under section 285 (6) 
of the Criminal Code was laid against Woods. 

About two weeks later, commissioner W. H. Stringer 
of the Ontario provincial Police, passed through Belle- 
ville and stopped at District Headquarters there. Sergeant 
Ervine F. Hartleib, temporarily in charge of the district, 
informed commissioner Stringer that there was apparently 
political interference by one, colonel Vandewater, in 
connection with the prosecution of the woods Case, sergeant 
Hartleib was simply retailing to commissioner Stringer allegat- 
ions made by Constable Keays to Sergeant Hartleib. as a result 
of the allegations made by Constable Keays through Sergeant Hartleib, 
Commissioner Stringer immediately detailed Staff Inspector E. T. 
Doyle to proceed to Belleville for the purpose of making an 


investigation into the alleged interference, whose report dated 
November 28th, 1947, is made Exhibit 156 in this inquiry. 

The LeRoy Woods case came to trial before Magistrate 
T. T. Wills in December 1947, and his written judgment was given 
on January 29th, 1948. In his judgment he acquitted Woods of 
the charge under section 285 (4) of the Criminal Code and con- 
victed Woods under section 285 (6) of the Criminal Code. 

In January of 1948, Provincial Constable Keays made 

further allegations with respect to the LeRoy Woods case. These 

allegations are contained in a letter address/ to Staff Inspector 

E. T. Doyle and, without going into detail, Constable Keays 

alleges that the Crown Attorney, B. C. Donnan, misconducted the 

case by failing to call witnesses who could give relevant evidence 

and by issuing instructions that both charges against LeRoy woods 

be withdrawn. 

Constable Keays also alleges that Constable G. R. Purdy 
submitted false reports in connection with the LeRoy Woods case, 
and that Provincial Constable S. Ervine committed perjury at the 
hearing of the LeRoy Woods case. It is admitted by Constable Purdy 
that he altered in a material aspect his report of this case required 
by the Department of Highways in connection with motor accidents. 
This alteration was based on subsequent information after fuller 
inquiry, and was made for the express purpose of making the said 
report conform to the facts. Constable Keays further charged 
that Provincial Constable Sam Ervine falsified his diary to 
support his alleged perjury at the hearing before Magistrate Wills. 

The Commissioner of Police for Ontario, William H. Stringer, 
ordered Staff Inspector A. Moss to make a thorough and searching 
investigation into the allegations of Constable Keays. This 
investigation was completed on January 30th, 1948 (Exhibit 163 
in this inquiry). Staff Inspector Moss was unable to find any 
evidence sufficient to substantiate the allegations of Constable 


I find as a fact that pursuant to fuller information 
received by Constable Purdy, he did make a material alteration 
in his report to the Provincial Department of Highways. I find 
further as a fact that this was done through inability on the part 
of Constable Purdy to measure and comprehend the probable con- 
sequences of such conduct. The responsibility for such lack of 
accurate information on the part of junior constables must rest 
on the officers and non-commissioned officers of the district 
concerned. It is abundantly clear from the evidence, and all 
the surrounding circumstances that Constable Purdy neither apprec- 
iated nor intended any wrongdoing, much less deception, by this 
irregular and, ordinarily indefensible, conduct. The charges of 
perjury and falsification of documents (diary) made by Constable 
Keays against Constable Sam Ervine have been in no way established 
in evidence and completely fail by way of proof. 

Concerning the Gerald Holdenbeck Incident: 

This was a matter in which one, Gerald Holdenbeck, driver 
of a Rathbun bus operating between Trenton and Belleville, was 
involved in an accident on Number 2 Highway, near the Ontario school 
for the Deaf, about one-half mile west of Belleville, on Thursday, 
August 7th, 1947, at approximately 12.55 A.M. Holdenbeck apparently 
was driving the bus with a defective lighting system. He ran into 
and injured one James Tweedy, a young man of about twenty years of 
age, who, as a result of such injuries, died shortly after arrival 
at the hospital. 

Shortly after the accident, Provincial Constable Keays 
appeared and started an investigation. Provincial Constable 
Driscoll also appeared on the scene and was told by Constable Keays 
that his services were not needed as he, Keays, with Provincial 
Constable Gagne, would conduct the investigation. Constable Keays, 
in paragraph 33 of Exhibit 1, alleges that Provincial Constable 


Driscoll made a false accusation against Keays by stating that he, 
Keays, was drunk at the scene of the investigation into the Holdenbeck 
accident, and as a result of that accusation, Crown Attorney B.C.Donnan 
withdrew the information against Holdenbeck, wherein Holdenbeck was 
charged with dangerous driving under section 285 (6) of the Criminal Code. 

Crown Attorney B.C.Donnan, in his evidence, indicates that 
he was in some doubt as to the proper charge to be laid in connection 
with the Holdenbeck case. The Crown Attorney corresponded with the 
officials of the Attorney-General's Department as to the proper charge 
to be laid and, after some delay, it was decided that a charge should 
be proceeded with as a summary conviction matter under section 285 (6) 
of the Criminal Code. A good deal of time had elapsed, and when the 
charge was finally laid, the six months' limitation period provided by 
the Code for summary conviction matters had elapsed and it was im- 
possible to proceed with the charge. On the hearing before Magistrate 

T. Y. Wills, the defence counsel raised as a defence the statute of 


limitations with respect to summary conviction matters, and as a 
result Crown Attorney Donnan withdrew the charge on the suggestion of 
the Magistrate rather than have it dismissed in the event that it was 
later decided to proceed by way of indictment* 

There was no evidence presented on this inquiry sufficient 
to warrant a finding that Constable Driscoll reported that Constable 
Keays was under the influence of liquor at the scene of the investi- 
gation into the Holdenbeck incident, or on any other occasion. 

Concerning Nathan Ledgin and Sam Apple: 

Constable Keays' allegations with respect to this matter 
are contained in paragraph 33 of Exhibit 1, as follows :- 

"It is evident that Prov. Const. DRISCOLL has acquired a 
tendency to be treacherous with police matters as verified 
by the fact that in 1944, he submitted a false report in 
an investigation, and had a junior R.C.M.P. member submit 
a false report to his H.Q. in order to cover up his 

(DRISCOLL) actions which resulted in a municipality 

losing a $500*00 fine, and 2 R.C.M.P. members transferred 

from the Belleville area. The municipality involved demanded 
the transcription of Prov. Const. DRISCOLL's evidence, obtained 
an affidavit from one witness, and would have taken action if 
they had had my evidence to substantiate their findings. The 
matter was referred to the District Inspector." 

On November 1st, 1944, Provincial Constable J.B.Driscoll, assist- 
ed by Constable Morris Kennedy of the R.C.M.P., seized a Ford coupe in 
the City of Belleville, containing a quantity of Quebec liquor. Nathan 
Ledgin and Sam Apple were charged under The Liquor Control Act, and 
Ledgin was, on November 2nd, convicted and fined Five Hundred Dollars 
and costs and the liquor and vehicle confiscated. The charge against 
Apple was withdrawn. 

Normally, in a seizure of this kind, made in a municipality 
which has its own police department, the case would have been handed 
over to the municipal police to prosecute, but in this case, on the 
instructions of the then District Inspect H. Storey (since deceased) 
the Provincial Police carried the case to its conclusion. On November 
2nd, Ledgin was fined Five Hundred Dollars and costs and the liquor and 
car confiscated, and the charge against Apple was withdrawn. The fine 
thus went to the Provincial Government. It was a matter over which 
Constable Driscoll had no control, as he was only a Constable and 
subject to the instructions of his superior officers. 

Irrespective of the specific claims made by the Provincial 
Government and the municipality referable to the proceeds of this 
Five Hundred Dollar fine, which in no way comes within the purview of 
this inquiry, I can find no evidence, direct or by way of inference, 
sufficient to support the charges made by Constable Keays in paragraph 
33 of Exhibit 1, and I find such charges completely unsupported by 

There are several other allegations or charges in Exhibit 1, 
including the Badgley case, with which it is unnecessary specifically 
to deal. Suffice it is to say that they have no foundation in the 
evidence accepted by me, and are wholly and completely without justi- 
fication or merit. 


I am of the opinion that it is both expedient and 
desirable to make a careful appreciation of the attributes and 
limitations of Constable J. E. Keays referable to capacity, 
integrity, capability, loyalty, and his ability and desire to 
co-operate with other members of the Ontario Provincial Police 
in the performance of their individual and conjoint duties. 

Capacit y: 

The capacity of Constable J, E. Keays by way of 
intellectual endowment, mental equipment and qualifications 
as to industry, willingness, devotion to duty and zeal in the 
performance of police duty, is abundantly apparent and recog- 
nized and freely admitted by his superiors and associates. 

Integrity : 

In the realm of public or private endeavour, in- 
tegrity is a necessary quality but especially so in the 
sphere of action assigned to police activities. In Constable 
J. E. Keays this "condition precedent" to effective police 
work is, in my opinion, open to grave question. Integrity 
in a police officer is lacking, if, when arriving at conclus- 
ions, the entirety of the facts is not taken into consideration 
unhindered by any extraneous or subjective consideration. 

Capability : 

Outstanding, especially when referable to resource- 
fulness, pertinacity and application. He is bilingual, has 
an accurate knowledge of the nicety of distinction in language, 
and subject to certain limitations expressly hereinafter men- 
tioned, writes a highly intelligent and well-considered report. 

Reliability : 

Here the evidence discloses that Constable J. E. 
Keays is not on all occasions trustworthy. A careful review 


of all the evidence directs me unhesitatingly to the conclusion 
that where his interest, as conceived by him, comes into con- 
flict with his duty, the latter is likely to suffer. 

Loyalty and Co-operation : 

Whether due to excessive zeal or mis-directed 
energy, or a combination of the two, there is clearly a 
tendency to attribute improper and ulterior motives to those 
with whom he does not agree. This unfortunate character- 
istic greatly limits his usefulness, stimulates friction 
and irritation and jeopardizes the efficiency and general 
well-being of the force. His ambition to achieve distinct- 
ion and his desire to control the direction of any invest- 
igation in which he is associated with others, drastically 
impairs his capacity and usefulness for effective co- 
operation with other members of the force, 

I am not unaware of the gravity of certain aspects 
of my findings but in support thereof I call an array of ad- 
missions by Constable J. E. Keays which is formidable and 
damaging evidence. This circumstance, reinforced by evidence 
adverse to the sworn testimony of Constable Keays, confirms 
beyond rational peradventure the irresistible conclusions 
hereinbefore written. Amongst other matters in evidence 
I note — 
(a) The admission by Constable J. E. Keays that with 

deliberation he breached the sworn oath of secrecy 
(page 1301 of the transcription of evidence) :- 

"Oath of Office and Secrecy 

"I, John Ernie KEAYS do swear that I will faithfully 
discharge my duties as a civil servant and except 
as I may be legally authorized or required I will 


not disclose or give to any person any information 
or document that comes to my knowledge or possess- 
ion by reason of my being a civil servant. So help 
me God, 

"SWORN before me at the 
city of Niagara Falls, Ont. 
in the County of Welland 
this 1st day of April 194S 

»F. F. Forestell* 

♦ J. E. Keays* 

Q. The date? 

A. 1st day of April, 

Q. 194S? 

A. 1943. 

Q. Before or after your interview with the two 

representatives in Toronto? 
A. Before. 
Q. May I take it from your manner of reading that 

you were guilty of any breach of this document 

in communicating with these two officials of the 

Toronto Daily Star? 
A. Well — 
Q. You have decided that you breached that oath of 

allegiance and oath of secrecy to which you swore? 
A. I did most definitely. 

Q. Is that a valid oath before Mr. Forestell? 
A. It is, sir. 
Q. Within two months after swearing it, or three 

months, you deliberately breached it? 
A. deliberately 1 is the right word." 


(b) The sworn evidence of Constable Keays that he did not 
go to the newspaper press. 

(c) The evidence of Constable Keays under oath that George 
Smith was not called as a witness at the inquest into 
the shooting of Police Constable H. H # Dent on July 
9th, 1940, Admittedly George Smith was called as a 
witness and gave evidence at this inquest, 

(d) The sworn testimony of Constable Keays that he broke a 
branch or twig and passed it through Maki f s head immed- 
iately after the shooting of Maki by Sergeant Stringer. 


On many occasions Constable J. E. Keays referred to 
the integrity of the uniform and the justification of his con- 
duct in its defence. It is but a truism and in all probability 
recognized by anyone with an intellect as acute as Constable 
Keays that the prestige and dignity of the uniform is in no 
way more seriously jeopardized than by disloyalty to those 
who have been placed in authority by His Majesty in the right 
of a duly constituted Government. 

The ability in the realm of police activities and 
the capacity for effective investigation, vigilance and resource- 
fulness of Constable Keays is exemplified, even demonstrated, 
by ten commendations awarded him by District Inspectors in 
almost every theatre in which he served. A list of such 
commendations appears as appendix 2 to this Report. 

Notwithstanding the capability and general capacity 
of Constable J. E. Keays, I an bound to the conclusion that 
his services cannot, in the interest of the Provincial Police Force 
for Ontario, be retained. The charges and allegations of 


wrong-doing, pre jury, deceit, inefficiency, impartiality 
and incapacity against public officials and police officers 
so emphatically made, urged and confidently reiterated by 
this police officer, remain wholly unsupported and completely 
without vindication, justification, mitigation or excuse. 

Your Commissioner therefore recommends that for 
cause, the services of John Ernest Keays in the Provincial 
Police Force for Ontario should be forthwith terminated* In 
view of his past service, it is further recommended that 
all moneys paid by him towards a pension or retirement fund, 
should, with accrued interest, be repaid to him. 

Inspector W. A* Page; 

I am respectfully of opinion that this officers 
period of effective usefulness to the service of the 
Provincial Police is over. He has to his credit years of 
efficient service, but at the present time he has marked 
physical limitations and incapacities* Your Commissioner 
submits and recommends that in the interests of the service 
Inspector Page should be retired on pension. 

Sergeant E» F. Hartleib: 

Your Commissioner further respectfully recommends 
that Sergeant E. F. Hartleib after long and efficient 
service should, in the interests of the service, be retired 
on pension. 

Finally, I am of opinion and it is respectfully 
submitted and recommended that there should be a complete 
reorganization of personnel at the headquarters of District 
No. 8# This submission and recommendation is premised on 
the basis that antagonisms, prejudices, misdirected impulses 
and inflamed passions, which have arisen prior to and during 

* » 


this inquiry, would be in all probability, by such a 
reorganization, rendered less pronounced, if not entirely 

Respectfully submitted, 

July 11th, 1949. 

Appendix "A " 


No. 9. District Belleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment. 
October 30th, 1948. 




1st. & The Commissioner, 

final Report. Ontario Provincial police, 

Toronto, Ontario. 

D.H.Q.File Sir, 








In connection with the marginally noted subject, I have 
the honour to report that in August, 1945, as the result 
of a complaint registered at the Commissioner's office 
by Dr. R. T. NOBLE, Registrar, College of physicians and 
Surgeons, Toronto, I was instructed to investigate the 
actions of Ernest M. CAREFOOT, Belleville, a charlatan, 
who had victimized the public to the extent of thousands 
of dollars as the result of administering a substance 
or method of treatment held out as a guaranteed cure 
for cancer. 

Knowing that B.C. DONNAN, K.C., Crown Attorney, was im- 
plicated in a fraud on the general public with CAREFOOT, 
and that he was taking patients to CAREFOOT for treatment 
well knowing that he was a disqualified medical pract- 

that he was making use of narcotics, 
to implicate me with CAREFOOT during 
I requested that the investigation be 
officer from the C.I.B. 

itioner, further, 
(Mr. DONNAN tried 
the Fall of 1944) 
turned over to an 

I was directed to carry out the investigation and be 
guided by the Crown's instructions. After making certain 
enquiries I interviewed the Crown Attorney who instructed 
me to discontinue the investigation and turn the matter 
over to a junior member of the Belleville Detachment with 
the result that in September, 1945, on the instructions 
of District Inspector H. THOMPSON, I submitted a report 
under the signature of Prov. Const. E. BOWEN, and, at 
the direction of the Crown Attorney, the matter was re- 
ferred back to the College of physicians and Surgeons 
for their investigation. 

On numerous occasions during October and November, 1945, 
Mr. DONNAN enquired if I had received further instruct- 
ions in connection with CAREFOOT, and December 10th., 
1945, the day the Commissioner inspected D.H.Q,. , Mr. 
DONNAN enquired as to the purpose of the Commissioner's 
visit - if he had mentioned the CAREFOOT case, and, if I 
thought that he was in Belleville in connection with the 
CAREFOOT matter. At that time Mr. DONNAN informed me that 
he was not taking "any more chances" - he had communicated 
with CAREFOOT "at noon" and advised him to "smash up" the 
electrical machines with which he was treating patients 
allegedly suffering from cancer and other diseases. 

(this was substantiated Tuesday, March 19th. /46, when 
CAREFOOT T s premises were searched - 5 of these alleged 
"radio machines" were found "smashed up" in the cellar, with 
the broken wooden frames under a wood pile near the furnace- 
This was further substantiated in July, 1946, when 
one George BROV/N was interviewed. Brown stated that 

Appendix "A" 

District Belleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment. 

October 30th, 1948. 




lst. & 

final Report. 


Detachment File 


5. he was treated by CAREFOOT between December 1st. and 
15th, 1945, after he (CAREFOOT) had diagnosed his ail- 
ment as that of cancer. During these treatments 
CAREFOOT told him that he was the "last" patient to be 
treated with the "radio" machines, as he had finally 
perfected a liquid formula which was far superior than 
the "radio" machines; further, during the course of the 
investigation, every person interviewed - who was 
attended by CAREFOOT between December 1945 and March 
1946 - was treated with liquids and no machine of any 
kind was used.) 

6. Thursday, March 14th, 1946, I was instructed to cnntiniB 
this investigation with Inspector G. MONAHAN, College 
of physicians and Surgeons, Toronto, with the result 
that Tuesday, March 19th, 1946, as sufficient evidence 
was obtained to warrant charges of fraud against 
CAREFOOT, the facts were placed before Mr. DONNAN who 
explained that he could not prosecute the case as CARE- 
FOOT was a client of his in civil practice, and turned 
the matter over to Mr. G. ROBERTSON, Ass»t to the Crown 
Attorney, after instructing that charges of obtaining 
money by false pretences be preferred against CAREFOOT. 
He also directed that anything connected with this case 
was to be referred to Mr. ROBERTSON for instructions. 

7. At IE. 30 p.m., Tuesday, March 19th. /46, at the directicn 
of Mr. ROBERTSON - in the event that Mr. DONNAN communi- 
cated with CAREFOOT - Prov. Const. G. SIPLE was placed 
on observation with instructions to follow anyone seen 
leaving CAREFOOT 1 s residence with anything which might 
arouse his suspicion. On Mr. ROBERTSON'S instructions, 
three charges of obtaining money (in excess of $2,5.) by 
false pretences were preferred against CAREFOOT under 
Sec. 405 C.C., and a warrant was issued for his arrest. 

8. At 8.00 p.m., CAREFOOT was arrested at his residence. - 
Shortly after 8.30 p.m., when CAREFOOT was escorted to 
the Detachment office, Mrs. CAREFOOT communicated with 
Mr. DONNAN pointing out that CAREFOOT was arrested and 
escorted to the Provincial Police Office, and, enquired 
as to what she should do. About 20 minutes later, 
while executing the search warrant, I was advised by 
Prov. const. C. ARMSTRONG that a Mr. ROBB , local lawyer, 
was at the Detachment office demanding the release of 
CAREFOOT as bail had been set at .^2,000.00. 

9. At the Detachment office, on learning from the Justice 
of the peace that Mr. DONNAN had instructed her to meet 
Mr. ROBB at the Provincial Police office and release 
the accused on .^2000. bail, I refused to release 
CAREFOOT. I communicated with Mr. DONNAN and informed 
him that wehad received certain instructions from Mr. 
ROBERTSON (Mr. DONNAN waB against the search of 

Appendix "A" 

District Belleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment. 
October 30th, 1948. 

1st. & 9. 
final report. 

D.H.Q,. File 




CAREFOOT'3 premises) . CAREFOOT had only been detained 30 
minutes, and I had not as yet had the opportunity of question- 
ing CAREFOOT in connection with any of the charges or the 
articles which were going to be seized from his premises. At 
this stags it was obvious that Mr. DONNAN did not want me to 
question CAREFOOT for personal reasons. 


10. At 11.30 p.m., as Mr. DONNAN had deprived the Crown of the 
opportunity of questioning the accused, and knowing that 
CAREFOOT was represented by counsel, I decided not to 

Detachment File question the accused in connection with any of the articles 

seized, including the morphine and opium, and, CAREFOOT was 
released on whatever arrangements Mr. DONNAN made with 
Mr. ROBB , defence counsel, (in this connection, reference 
can be made to the evidence where Magistrate T.Y.WILLS 
points out to A. SLAGHT, K.C., "I did not know that CAREFOOT 
was granted bail until 3 days after his arrest".) 
(in connection with the narcotics, it will be noted that at 
1.00 p.m. that date, I requested the assistance of the 
R.C.M.P. in the search of CAREF00T f s premises.) 

11. From certain documents seized from CAREFOOT* s residence, 
along with correspondence from the Federal Authorities, 
it was evident that Mr. DONNAN was definitely implicated 
in a fraud on the general public with CAREFOOT between 
the years 1936 and 1945, and, would substantiate the fact 
that Mr. DONNAN released CAREFOOT and deprived the Crown 
of the opportunity to question the accused for personal 

12. In view of the above, Wednesday, March 20th./46, I re- 
quested to be paraded before the Commissioner with the 
result that Thursday, March 21st., the above mentioned 
facts were placed before the commissioner at Toronto, 
and, I again requested that the investigation be turned 
over to an officer from the C.I.B. The commissioner 
discussed the matter with a member of the Attorney -General's 
Department. I was directed to continue the investigation, 
and, "let the chips fall where they may" - with the 
assurance that I would be protected from any trouble with 
Mr. DONNAN, as the result of this investigation. 

13. At 2.30 p.m., Saturday, March 23rd;, 1946, in the presence 
of witness, I was threatened by Mr. DONNAN that should I 
give certain evidence which would implicate him with 
the accused, I might be charged with accessory to the fact, 
and, later threatened that he would get me if it was the 
last thing he ever did. This was followed by a letter 
to V/.B. COMMON, K.C., in which Mr. DONNAN criticized me 
most unjustly. In May, 1946, certain documents (in 
connection with this case) disappeared from Mr. ROBERTSON'S 
file, and, from then on, I was instructed to forward all 
correspondence direct to the Attorney-General's Department. 

Appendix "A" 

District Belleville, Ontario 

Belleville Detachment. 
October 30th, 1948. 



lst. & 

final report 

D.H.Q,. File 

14. pursuant to instructions of March 21st., Sunday, March 
24th., I submitted a confidential report in connection 
with the actions of Mr. DONNAN, and, the reason why I 
was not assisted by the R.C.M.P. in connection with the 
narcotics. In this report, I requested certain instruct- 
ions, and also requested that certain enquiries be con- 
ducted outside the City of Belleville. To date, my 
report has not been acknowledged. 

Detachment File 15. 


In view of the actions of the Crown Attorney, and the fact 
that I was not assisted by the R.C.M.P. on the night of 
the search, CAREFOOT had to be re-arrested in June, 1946, 
charged under the Narcotic and Drug Act. CAREFOOT was 
prosecuted on one charge of fraud (the other 2 charges were 
adjourned Sine Die) and one charge under the Narcotic and 
Drug Act. The court and the Jury were deprived of the 
above mentioned facts and both charges were dismissed. 





Both trials supplied good entertainment to the public 
and the Jury at the expense of the uniform and the med- 
ical profession who were represented by some of their 
highest authorities; further, while under cross-examination 
by A. SLAGHT, K.C., I found myself in a precarious posi- 
tion in order to answer certain question without implic- 
ating Mr. DONNAN. 

From then on, Mr. DONNAN 
against me and interfered 
investigated, to the poin 
remarked several times to 
of these days I»m going t 
and so (Mr. DONNAN)". I 
ference as I was satisfie 
before the Bar, I had dis 

tried to carry out his threats 

with practically every case I 

t where the District Inspector 

the officers at D.H.Q. "some 
o go to Toronto and fix that so 
paid no attention to the inter- 
d that once a prisoner was 
charged my duties as a police 

This carried on until the Spring of 1947, when Prov. 
Const. S. ERVINE (an officer stationed at Belleville 
for more than 15 years - who is nothing more than a 
rubber stamp, with no record whatever to offer as a 
police officer) started to interfere with investigations 
in order to serve his own purpose. This continued until 
September, 1947, when this officer suggested that I 
subdue my evidence on a charge of attempted murder, which 
was preferred on the instructions of C.L.SNIDER, K.C., 
Deputy Attorney-General, in order to assist his (Ervine) 
influential friend who was acting for the accused. The 
Crown Attorney did not want me to act as brief on this 
case and ordered me out of the court during the trial. 

The evening of the same day prov. Const. ERVINE pointed 
out to me that "I was a good cop but did not know how 
to play with the right guys" and, how he (Ervine) was a 
personal friend of District inspector W.A.PAGE who in 
turn was the commissioner's best friend; (this fact was 
later made known in public in the presence of about 150 
people) further, that the Commissioner had attempted to 
transfer him from Belleville when he was paraded before 
him at Toronto in January, 1947, but that he did not have 
sufficient authority to get him transferred from Belleville 

Appendix "A" 

District Belleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment. 
October 30th, 1948. 



1st. & 

final report. 

D.H.Q,. File 

Detachment File 



20. Shortly after, on 3 different occasions, I interviewed 
Inspector PAGE and requested that, in view of certain 
existing conditions, I be transferred to some other 
Detachment within the District before I found myself 
discredited as a police officer. Inspector PAGE refused, 
pointing out that he had recommended me for promotion to 
the C.I.B. Prov. Const. ERVINE continued to interfere 
with my investigations, and, November 18th., I submitted 
a report requesting a transfer from Belleville D.H.Q,. to 
a Detachment within the District. This report was not 
acknowledged, but Inspector PAGE informed me that Chief 
Inspector A. WARD had recommended me for promotion to 
the C.I.B. 

21. In November, 1947, Prov. Const. ERVINE interfered to the 
point where he had Mr. DONNAN issue instructions that 2 
criminal charges be withdrawn against one LeRoy WOODS, 
(whom I arrested and was allowed his freedom on ^200.00 
bail) and, Had Prov. Const. G.R.PURDY submit a false 
report to D.H.Q,. in connection with this criminal invest- 
igation - again in order to assist his influential friend 
who was acting for the accused. This action was taken 
after I had refused to withdraw the charges at the request 
of the Crown Attorney. 

22. (In this connection, it will be noted that sometime after 
I returned to Belleville (April 15th. /48) Prov. Const. 
PURDY came to my home one evening, and stated that when 
he was questioned by s/lnsp. T. DOYLE in connection with 
Prov. Const. ERVINE 1 s actions regarding the WOODS case, 
he did not have the "courage" to admit that prov. Const. 
ERVINE was responsible for the information to Mr. DONNAN 
that n l did not have any evidence to support the charges 

s against WOODS" which resulted in the Crown issuing ins- 
tructions that both charges be withdrawn, and, he submitted 
the false report accordingly.) 

23. (Prov. Const. PURDY explained that, at the time, he was 
on "probation" and was of the opinion that if he accepted 
the responsibility himself he would keep out of trouble 
and would not jeopardise his chances for "permanency" 
(permanent appointment) and, submitted a report to the 
Commissioner according to his statement to S/lnsp. DOYLE; 
further, that, as he had no experience at the time, he 
did not appreciate the seriousness of the situation, but, 
now he realized that he was part of a great injustice, and 
did not know what to do to rectify his mistake. He was 
advised that the only way the matter could be rectified 
was for him to put it in writing.) 

24. Prov. const. PURDY 1 s false report was withdrawn from the 
mail at D.H.Q,. , and finding my status jeopardised to the 
extent that I was liable to civil action, I interviewed 
Mr. DONNAN and demanded that at least one charge be 
proceeded with. Both charges were enlarged from week 

to week, and December 19th., Prov. Const. ERVINE, although 
not summoned and who knew nothing of the case, was called 
as a Crown witness by Mr. DONNAN. Under cross-examination 
Prov. const. ERVINE contradicted my evidence and delib- 
erately committed perjury by submitting certain facts 
which he alleged occurred on #14 Highway. SEPTEMBER 28th. 
(3 months previous) in order to exonerate the accused. 
It was obvious that the answers to the numerous questions 
were known to defence counsel. 

Appendix "A w 

slJjs^t Belleville Detachment. 

District Belleville, Ontario. jSBBalfi 

^jpflw October 30th, 1948. 



lst. & 25. After court, as I was in charge of the Belleville Detach- 
final report. ment, I checked Prov. Const. ERVINE' s diary and found that 

on SEPTEMBER 28th., he was no where near No. 14 Highway, 
but, on checking his diary, one week later, it was found 
that prov. Const. ERVINE had added the following entry 

D.H.Q,.File to this diary date "#14 Highway to Foxboro". (patrolling). 

Following up this investigation, it was found that the 
facts alleged by Prov. Const. ERVINE to have occurred 

Detachment File SEPTEMBER 28th. (3 smashed guide rail posts) did not 

occur until 2.00 a.m., NOVEMBER 1st. (Hallowe'en night) 
One Harold PHILLIPS was responsible for smashing these 

Staff 3 guide rail posts and never reported the accident. 


26. In view of para. 21, 24 and 25, at 10.00 a.m., December 
29th., I reported the facts to Inspector PAGE and re- 
quested that prov. Const. ERVINE be instructed to return 
in the witness box and rectify his evidence, as my cred- 
ibility was questioned. Inspector PAGE stated that prov. 
Const. ERVINE could not do that, and referred me to Mr. 
DONNAN. Instead of Inspector PAGE taking the necessary 
steps to check prov. Const. ERVINE' s diary, he recom- 
mended him for promotion - December, 1947. The same date, 
the facts were placed before Mr. DONNAN who admitted that 
Prov. const. ERVINE had submitted the above mentioned 
evidence, but he could not do anything about it. It was 
pointed out to Mr. DONNAN that my credibility was quest- 
ioned as the result of prov. Const. ERVINE 's false evid- 
ence, further, the court was entitled to all the evidence 
on this Criminal charge. In the meantime I was posted 

to Niagara Falls. 

27. I waited 10 days, and, after placing the facts before 
Senior Officers of this Force for advice, I submitted 
a detailed report and requested instructions. January 
13th. , I interviewed Inspector PAGE and enquired about 
my report pointing out that I had requested certain ins- 
tructions. I was asked why I wanted instructions, and 
replied "in order to protect my self-respect". I was 

told "the hell with your G — D self-respect", (this 

was to be expected from an Inspector transferred to the 
Belleville District under a fog.) I enquired if it 
would be in order to remain in Belleville until the 
WOODS case was disposed of, and, was told to carry out 
instructions and report to Niagara Falls as directed. 

28. This report was held at D.H.Q. when I left Belleville 
January 15th. /48. If Inspector PAGE intended to enquire 
into prov. Const. ERVINE 's actions, he certainly could 
have requested the evidence December 29th., when I first 
reported to him, or, easier still, check with the Mag- 
istrate's notes which were eventually made part of his 
judgment. Instead, January 11th., he had Dorothy D0W- 
DEIL> D.H.Q,. stenographer, type the court stenographer's 
notes (G. Sheppard) on the evidence. A most improper 
procedure, with the result that the transcription was 
not signed by the Magistrate. This girl, (for obvious 
reasons) during the past year and a half, has been allow- 
ed to issue instructions throughout the District, and, 
July 10th., 1948, was held up for ridicule in the slander 
sheet, HUSH, at the expense of the Force not to mention 
the reflection cast on the officers at this D.H.Q,. who 
were not responsible. 

Appendix "A H . 

District Belleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment. 
October 30th, 1948. 


lst. & 29. 

final report. 

D.H.q. File 

Detachment File 






January 16th., when I reported to Inspector C. AIREY at 
Niagara Falls, it was learned that he had already re- 
ceived a memorandum from Inspector PAGE pointing out 
that there was no use of granting me permission to re- 
turn to Belleville for Monday, January 19th., to attend 
court in connection with the WOODS case, as he (Insp. 
PAGE) had discussed the whole case with the Crown Attorn- 
ey who had instructed that I would not be required any 
further in this case. On the instructions of Inspector 
PAGE and Mr. DONNAN, the court was deprived of certain 
evidence on this criminal charge which could have been 
definitely submitted in rebuttal through the cross-ex- 
amination of the accused and Malcolm SINE, (both men 
assisted PHILLIPS the night he smashed the 3 guide rail 
posts.) - Evidently to protect Prov. Const. ERVINE. 

Documentary evidence was all that was required to prove, 
beyond any doubt, the charge against Prov. Const. ERVINE, 
but, to date my report has not been acknowledged , al- 
though I requested certain instructions; further, the 
special report submitted in connection with the WOODS 
case, and that of Harold PHILLIPS, was withe Id from the 
Department of Highways with the result that PHILLIPS 
was not assessed with the costs of the damage to the 3 
guide rail posts. Instead of prov. Const. ERVINE being 
at least reprimanded for having committed perjury and 
falsifying official records, he was exonerated and pro- 
moted by the Commissioner. Prov. Const. PTJRDY was also 
exonerated, after submitting a false report to D.H.Q.. 
on a criminal charge. 

February, 1948, Cpl. ERVINE was instructed by the Com- 
missioner that he was transferred to Cornwall, but, is 
still in Belleville, and made good his boast that even 
the commissioner could not transfer him from Belleville. 
Since Prov. Const. ERVINE was promoted, he has attacked 
the character of a police officer at D.H.Q,., as the result 
of a false accusation made to his Superior. In view of 
this officer's conduct, he is certainly not worthy of 
wearing the King's uniform, and, ssd it remains to be seen 
what he would do if he held the life of a man in his hand. 

In view of the false statements and accusations made 
against me by Constables and Senior Officers of the Force, 
since I reported that Prov. Const. ERVINE had committed 
perjury on a criminal charge, I found myself discredited 
as a police officer, and my integrity jeopardized to the 
extent that I can never again appear as witness for the 
Crown without my evidence being discredited under cross- 

While I was stationed at Niagara Falls, it came to my 
attention that one of these false accusations was made 
by Prov. Const. J. B. DRISCOLL, Belleville. As the result 
of this false accusation, a criminal charge was withdrawn 
by Mr. DONNAN. This criminal charge was preferred on the 
instructions from G.L. SNIDER, K.C., Deputy Attorney-Gen- 
eral, and involved a fatality. It is evident that Prov. 
Const. DRISCOLL has acquired a tendency to be treacherous 
with police matters as verified by the fact that in 1944, 

Appendix "A n 

District Belleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment. 
October 30th, 1948. 



1st. & 
final report. 

D.H.Q,. File 

Detachment File 



33. he submitted a false report in an investigation, and had 

a junior R.C.M.P. member submit a false report to his H.Q. 
in order to cover up his (DR0SC0LL) actions which resulted 
in a municipality losing a .$500.00 fine, and 2 R.C.M.P. 
members transferred from the Belleville area. The municip- 
ality involved demanded the transcription of Prov. Const. 
DRISC OLL's evidence, obtained an affidavit from one 
witness, and would have taken action if they had had my 
evidence to substantiate their findings. The matter 
was referred to the District Inspector. 

34. While at Niagara Falls, I was paraded before the Com- 
missioner and pointed out that, as the result of certain 
false statements and accusations, I was discredited as 

a police officer. His only comment was that I need not 
bother about that - it was only jealousy, 

35. Subsequently, (as the Federal Authorities had appealed 
the court »s decision on the Narcotic charge in REX vs 
Carefoot) I learned that February 10th., 1948, Mr. 
Justice A. LEBEL had granted the appeal and ordered a 
new trial. It was obvious that at this trial the Jury 
would be faced with the evidence of a doctor and that of 
a discredited police officer, 

36. In view of the above, as I had faithfully upheld the 
duties of a police officer, and finding my career jeo- 
pardized, and, in all fairness to my wife who is res- 
ponsible for the few small accomplishments I have made 
and to my 5 children (2 in the Royal Canadian Airforce 
and 1 in the Navy) who were brought up and believe in 
the uniform and all that it represents, it was of para- 
mount importance that I find some way to regain my in- 
tegrity and status as a police officer. 

37. April 13th., 1948, with the assistance of Inspector G. 
AIREY, a man worthy of his rank who stands behind and 
fights for his men without fear or favour, I was ins- 
tructed by the commissioner to return to Belleville for 
posting in that District. April 15th., when I reported 
to Belleville for duty, instead of being posted, I was 
issued written instructions by Inspector PAGE that I was 
to remain at District Headquarters where I would not be 
allowed to drive any Government equipment or take part 
in any investigation, and, I would not even be allowed 
to bring any of my equipment (finger print, camera and 
R.C.M.P. files) to the office. I later demanded the 
reason for this drastic measure, pointing out that these 
written instructions were ruining my career. I was told 
"you got your instructions". 

38. I played solitaire at District Headquarters for 2 months, 
and, in June, as the result of certain representations 
made to the Commissioner by Inspector PAGE in May, I was 
dealt with more severely by being transferred to 24 hours 
shift work in the radio room, (known as the detention bar- 
rack) In this connection, reference can be made to Inspector 
PAGE f s memorandum issued to all officers at District 
Headquarters If they can't take proper care of Govern- 
ment cars and equipment .. ."they willbe taken off Gov- 
ernment cars and placed in the radio room". 

Appendix "A" 

District Belleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment. 
October 30th, 1948. 




1st. & 39. 

final report. 


Detachment Pile 






July 2nd., 1948, I was paraded before the Commissioner 
and Inspector PAGE at D.H.Q,., and, I requested a half 
hour of the commissioner's time to place certain facts 
before him in order to regain my integrity, as CAREFOOT 
had been arrested by the Federal Authorities and I was 
served with a summons, (the preliminary hearing was set 
for July 22nd.) I was told that I was only "imagining" 
things and he did not want to hear me, and, threatened 
"if I could not handle my 'job' on the radio, he would 
have to request my resignation from the Force". 

Thursday, July 8th, I was questioned byMr.E.FOLLVvELL, 
local Lawyer, representing the Federal Authorities in the 
CAREFOOT case, and asked if it was true that the author- 
ities would not trust me to take part in any investigation 
or drive any Government equipment, pointing out that this 
was apparently common knowledge around Belleville. I 
replied that I had received certain written instructions 
to that effect. I was also asked if Mr. DONNAN had threat- 
ened me should I give certain evidence in the CAREFOOT 
case. I replied that he had, shortly after I had arrest- 
ed CAREFOOT. He stated that he was going to report the 
matter to N. MATTHEWS, K.C., Toronto, who was represent- 
ing the Crown in REX vs. Carefoot. 

The same day, I learned that Mr. DONNAN had finally 
carried out his threats against me, as he was responsible 
for the written instructions issued to me by Inspector 
PAGE. - I cannot think of a better way that anyone can 
ruin the career of a police officer than by attacking 
his integrity and discrediting him. 

Consequently, July 12th., I was instructed to report to 
W.B. COMMON, K.C., Senior Counsel for the Attorney-General 
Department. At 2.00 p.m., I reported to W.C. KILLING, Dty. 
Commissioner, (who is also our staff Representative) and 
endeavoured to point out the above mentioned facts in 
order to regain my integrity (I used the word "framed" in 
order to put across the seriousness of the situation) but 
he did not want to hear anything about it. 

At 2.30 p.m., I appeared before W.B. COMMON, K.C., and 
the Commissioner, and, was questioned in connection with 
the actions of Mr. DONNAN in the CAREFOOT investigation. 
I repeated the above mentioned facts, and, submitted the 
false statements and accusations made against me - point- 
ing out to Mr. COMMON that in 1940, in a highgrade ore 
case involving thousands of dollars which he prosecuted, 
my evidence, although contradictory to the evidence of 3 
detectives 10 years my senior, was accepted after being 
subjected to 2 days cross-examination by defence counsel 
and convictions were registered, but, under my present 
circumstances my evidence would have been worthless. He 
admitted that he appreciated my position, but, "that 
wasn't his Department". I suggested that the persons 
responsible apologize in camera, in order to make it 
possible for me to reply to these false statements and 
accusations should I ever be faced with any of them 
under cross-examination during a trial - but without 

Appendix "A" 

District Belleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment. 
October 30th, 1948. 


1st. & 44 ' 

final report. 


Detachment File. 45. 



The brief in connection with the above mentioned case 
was prepared on July 21st., at which time N. MATTHEWS, 
K.C., questioned my status. I informed him that it was 
the same, and that nothing had been done about the 
written instructions or the false accusations. The 
following day CAREFOOT appeared before Magistrate T.Y. 
WILLS, and was committed for trial. 

pursuant to instructions, Wednesday, August 4th., I 
proceeded to Toronto and reported to Mr. COMMON in the 
presence of Mr. MATTHEWS, several persons representing 
the Federal Authorities, and, W.C. KILLING, Deputy-Com- 
missioner. Mr. MATTHEWS pointed out that I was a very 
material witness in the CAREFOOT case, but, in view of 
certain written instructions issued by a District Insp- 
ector, and other conditions which apparently were brought 
about as the result of the CAREFOOT investigation, it was 
apparent, judging from the attitude adoped by defence 
counsel at the preliminary hearing, that, at the trial, 
my evidence would be discredited oefore a Jury, and, un- 
less the matter could be rectified, he would much prefer 
to "gracefully withdraw at this stage" than proceed and 
run into difficulties. 

46. The Deputy Commissioner read a letter from my personal 
file which was allegedly forwarded by the commissioner 
to Inspector PAGE in April, 1948, suggesting that, in 
view of my experience, I be posted to the Napanee Detach- 
ment for duty, countermanding the unprincipled instruct- 
ions issued against me, and, instructing that I resume 

my former status. Mr. MATTHEWS enquired if I was aware 
of these instructions. I replied that this was the 
first I had heard about them; further, I had to borrow 
a car that day in order to comply with instructions 
to report to Toronto. 

47. Mr. COMMON was of the opinion that the contents of the 
letter read by the Deputy Commissioner would answer 
any questions I might be asked in connection with the 
written instructions. I suggested that the court might 
rule out my answers as "hearsay evidence". 

48. Mr. MATTHEWS also pointed out that should I be asked 
under cross-examination, why the R.C.M.P. did not assist 
in the search of CAREFOOT T s premises, my reply would 
have to be "because both officers were under the influ- 
ence of liquor at the time, and in no condition to carry 
out their duties". Mr. CURRAN, K.C., Senior counsel 
remarked that if I had reported the actions of the 
R.C.M.P. officers' in 1946, it was unfortunate that the 
Department had not seen fit to report the matter to the 
proper authorities for investigation at that time. After 
this meeting, I found myself in the middle of an R.C.M.P. 
investigation for a matter that should have been invest- 
igated in 1946. 


Appendix "A " 

District. Belleville, Ontario \%^mt~ Belleville Detachment. 

October 30th, 1948. 



1st. & 49. At 3.00 p.m., that date, I reported to the Deputy- 

final report. Commissioner and again endeavoured to place the 

facts before him without results. When I informed 
the Deputy Commissioner, I was surprised to hear 
at this date that Inspector PAGE had sufficient 
D.H.Q.File authority to overrule instructions issued by the 

Commissioner since April, 1948. I was instructed to 
forget I had ever heard about this letter, that, in 
view of Mr. MATTHEWS* demand he was obliged to 
divulge its contents, but, it was strictly confidential , 
Detachment File and, under no circumstances must I mention this letter. 

50. What a contretemps - A few hours previous, Mr. COMMON 
Staff was satisfied that I could use the contents of this 
personal. letter, as "hearsay evidence", to answer any questions 

in connection with my written instructions, and, now 
I found myself instructed by the Deputy commissioner 
that the matter was strictly confidential. 

51. It was evident that this letter was more or less used 
to hoodwink the Federal Authorities, and proved to 

me that the Officials of the Force were condoning 
the unscrupulous actions taken by Inspector PAGE, not 
to mention the false statements and accusations made 
by officers of this Force, (persons in authority) 
against a confrere, which is one of the most serious 
offences under the disciplinary Code. Apparently the 
integrity of a police officer is of no importance. 

52. I am not interested in the CAREFOOT case now that the 
accused is before the Bar. I was instructed to invest- 
igate, after requesting, on 2 different occasions, 
that the matter be turned over to an officer from the 
C.I. B., and carried out my duties as a police officer 
without fear or favour, and reported accordingly. I 

am not interested in the actions of the Crown Attorney, 
a well known confirmed drunkard, unless I am involved, 
(my actions since 1944, in this connection, speak for 
themselves) and, I am not interested in the admini- 
stration of the Belleville District, unless it is a 
matter likely to bring discredit on the reputation 
of the Force; my duty is to report, and not question 
the powers-that-be as to what action should be taken. 
I am only interested indecency and the dignity of 
the uniform. 

53. The fact that the actions of the Crown Attorney were 
condoned and he was allowed to carry out his threats, 
and, the fact that no disciplinary action was taken 
against inspector PAGE, Prov. const. ERVINE and PURDY, 
I find myself in a worse position than Igor GOUZENKO, 
who as a foreigner, was finally heard, but, as a decent 
Canadian citizen, who is only asking an opportunity to 
be heard in order to regain his integrity and status 
as a police officer, I am denied the right to a hearing, 
- Surely we have some dignity as a Police Force. 

Appendix M A" 

District Belleville, Ontario* 

Belleville Detaohment, 
October 30th, 1948 



Detachment File 54. 






1st. & final 



Having made use of every channel possible, and, as 
I must take certain action to regain my integrity 
in order to pursue my career, I have no alternative 
but to tender my resignation in order to remain 
within the Code of a police officer and protect my 

In conclusion, I would like to take this opportunity 
to reply to the false representations made against 
me by the Commissioner to the Hon. Leslie BLACKWELL, 
Attorney-General for Ontario, which, no doubt, re- 
sulted in the Attorney -General making threats against 
an officer of the Crown - "If I could not prove 
certain charges - I would be fired ♦ " 

1) "that I had caused dissension during my service 
with the Force, especially while stationed at 

In this connection, I would state that, during the 
four years I was in charge of the Belleville Detach- 
ment, I was the only Provincial Officer in the 
Province of Ontario with the rank of Constable, who, 
at the direction of the District Inspector and at 
the request of the various officers in charge of the 
numerous Detachments throughout #8 District, assisted 
every Detachment in a District in all major crimes - 
from rape to murders, also, every municipality, 
except Lindsay, and, as the result of good team work, 
convictions were registered in most cases. 

It will be noted that, when I returned to Belleville, 
April 15th., 1948, the same requests were made to the 
District Inspector by Provincial and Chief Constables 
in and out of the District, but, at this time, their 
requests were refused and they were told that I was 
not allowed to take part in any investigation. I 
would also refer to the correspondence and comments 
of the Commissioner during these 4 years, in which he, 
as late as November, 1947, highly praised my work. 

Between 1938 and 1941, while stationed in #9 District, 
on the instructions from the District Inspector, 
assisted the Alexandria, Cornwall, Hawkesbury, Morris- 
burg and Ottawa (Sgt i/c) Detachments on numerous 
occasions in connection with murders and series of 
crimes involving thousands of dollars - again, as 
the result of good team work, convictions were register* 
ed in all cases. In 1941, at the direction of C. L. 
SNIDER, K.C., Deputy Attorney-General, I was loaned to 
La Surete Manicipale de Hull, Quebec, in preparing a 
brief (112 witnesses) in a murder charge - 2 men were 

During my 12 years of service with the Force, I had 
the privilege of serving under the Command of 4 
District Inspectors who saw fit to recommend me as 


Appendix "A* 

District Belleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment, 
October 30th, 1948. 



lst & final 
Report • 

60 • 




63 o 


a) 1943 on the -recommendation of Inspector T.W. 
COUSANS, I was placed in charge of the Liquor 
iiquad in #9 District. 

b) 1945, recommended for promotion by the late 
Inspector H. STOREY who, in 1946, communicated 
with me requesting my approval to his re- 
commendation for transfer as an N.C.O. to the 
Kenora District, then under his command. 

c) July, 1946, recommended for promotion by the 
late Inspector H. THOMPSON. 

d) 1947, according to Inspector PAGE, he recommended 
me for promotion and November,/ 1947, Chief 
Inspector A. WARD recommended me for promotion 

to the Criminal Investigation Branch. 

Unless the Commissioner is of the opinion that I caused 
dissension while stationed at Ottawa, by the fact that, 
during the course of an investigation of which I was 
in charge, a Provincial Constable shot and killed a 
man, and as the result of false statements which he 
released to the press and submitted to the authorities, 
he subsequently had to repeat these statements before 
a Jury in order to protect his actions, and placed me 
in a very precarious position. 

After placing the facts before His Honour Judge C.W.A. 
MARION, the Crown Attorney, and the District Inspector, 
I gave notice before them that if I was expected to 
commit prejury before a Jury in order to cover up tte 
officer involved, I would turn in my uniform. 

The District Inspector conmunicated with the Commissioner 
who directed that my evidence be subdued, and, as a 
result, another officer had to take my place in order to 
produce certain exhibits in my possession. In the 
witness stand, this officer was asked the same questions 
I anticipated. The Jury was deprived of certain evidence, 
and, the officer involved was promoted. It will be 
noted that 2 weeks later the District Inspector apolo- 
gized to me for his attitude in connection with this 

The only officers I ever had any differences with 
during my service are Prov. Const. T. H. TRIMBLE, my 
junior, when I was in charge of the Liquor Squad in #9 
District, and, Prov. Const. S. ERVINE. (December, 1947). 
Both men have since been promoted by the Commissioner - 
Presumably on their merits. 

2) "I was placed in the radio room due to sickness, 
and was unable to perform any other duties" • 
In this connection, I would ~efer to the comments made 
by the Commissioner to Inspector C. AIREY, March, 1948 

n in view of this officer's record, I 1 !! see what can be 

«- 4 

Appendix "A 

It AH 

District Belleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment 
October 30th, 1948. 





1st & final 


done to give him a Detachment in the Peterborough 
District and, would refer to the memorandums from 
the Commissioner under date of April 12th. and 20th., 
1948, - in one, I was instructed to report to Belleville 
for posting in that District, and the other, suggesting 
that, in view of my experience, I be posted to the 
Napanee Detachment for duty. I would also refer to 
the comments of the Deputy Commissioner, February 18th., 
1948 - that if Inspector PAGE was not stationed at 

■I know all about it — I can't see 
you could not be posted back to Belle- 
years we have been trying to build this 
of your calibre - leave the matter in 
my hands and I'll see what I can do". The only thing 
I have to offer is health and self-respect. 

Belleville — - 
any reason why 
ville - for 20 
force with men 

65 • 3) "certain reflections cast, on the fact that I 

changed my name*. 
I did change my name from SOUBLIERE toKEAYS (my wife's 
surname) at the request of one of my boys who was leav- 
ing for service in the Pacific with the Armed Forces, 
and, for reasons well known to the Commissioner as sub- 
stantiated by his remarks, but, I did not know that 
there was a man who thought himself sufficiently im- 
portant to question my rights as a Canadian - not to 
mention the Laws of the Province of Ontario, and, 
I most respectfully suggest that if I have committed 
any crime by making use of the provisions made under 
The Change of Name Act, 1939, the facts should be 
placed before the proper authorities with a view of 
having this Act removed from the Statutes of the 
Province of Ontario* 

66» I am satisfied to leave my reputation as a police 

officer with the Judges of the Supreme Court of Canada 
and the Supreme Court of Ontario, County and District 
Judges, Magistrates, Crown Attorneys (including Mr. 
DONNAN, and I would refer to his letter of commendation 
forwarded to the Department in October, 1944, before 
the CAREF00T case) the Members attached to the Attorney- 
General^ Department and confreres with whom I have had 
the honour to come in contact with, during my career 
as a representative of the Crown, either in the sub- 
mission of evidence, criminal investigations or extra- 
dition proceedings. 

67 # In view of the above, as a discredited police officer, 
it is obvious that the Federal Authorities would de- 
cidedly prefer to withdraw the charge in the matter of 
Rex vs. Carefoot. 

Appendix "A w 

District Bblleville, Ontario. 

Belleville Detachment 
October 30th, 1948. 



lst & final Report 


68« I am proud to be a police officer, in my opinion 

the most ethical profession known, but for reasons 
set forth, and in order to pursue my career, I 
hereby tender my resignation from the Ontario 
Provincial Police effective November 15th, 1948. 
As I hold an honourable discharge from the Royal 
Canadian Mounted Police, and, as I have accumulated 
as many commendations as years of service with 
the Ontario Provincial Police, I would be grate- 
ful if the Commissioner would forward me a refer- 
ence according to my merits • 

Your obedient servant, 

"J. B. KEAYS* 

Prov» Constable* 

THE Commissioner of Police for Ontario 
Toronto, Ontario 


District Inspector • 



POLICE ORDER NO. 3. March 5. 1940 . 

Sergt. R. P. Labelle, Provincial Constables W. H. Kennedy, 

G. Hughes and J. E. Soubliere, Ottawa Detachment. 
Provincial Constable H. H. Dent, Rockland Detachment. 
Provincial Constable A. R. Macleod, Cornwall Detachment, and 
Provincial Constable R. H. Wannell, Hawkesbury Detachment. 

In connection with the arrests of Roger Jolicoeur, Jean Charles 
Lalonde, Jean Charles Campeau @ Paquette, Yvon, Claude, Dalvida and 
Lionel Lalonde, Anatole Lauzon, Armand Montpetit and Anatole Lemary; 
on numerous charges of Breaking, Entering and Theft of merchandise 
and auto accessories from several garages and stores in the 
Provinces of Quebec and Ontario. 

Jolicoeur, Campeau & Montpetit received sentences in the 
penitentiary; Lionel, Yvon & Jean Charles Lalonde, Lauzon and 
Lemary were committed to the Reformatory; Claude Lalonde to 
2 months in the County Gaol and five charges against Dalvida Lalonde 
were dismissed. 

(Recommended by District Inspector T. W. Cousans) . 

POLICE ORDER NO. 5, May 27. 1940 . 

Provincial Constables J. E. Soubliere and W. H. Kennedy, 
Ottawa Detachment. 

In connection with the arrests and conviction of Morris Hender- 
son alias Maurice Boudreau, Ernest St. Louis and George Purcell @ 
George Dorkin on charges of Breaking & Entering & Theft of automobile. 

On Saturday, May 18, 1940, the accused appeared before Magis- 
trate A. H. Leiff at Ottawa and sentenced to lengthy terms in the 
Kingston Penitentiary. 

(Recommended by District Inspector Cousans) . 

POLICE ORDER NO. 7. July 18, 1940 . 

Provincial Constable J. E. Soubliere, Ottawa Detachment. 

In connection with the arrest of Lester Arbuckle of Westboro, 
Ont. on a charge of Rape, Sec. 299 C.Code. 

On the 10th. June 1940 Lester Arbuckle appeared before 
Mr. Justice Chevrier at Ottawa and was sentenced to 10 years 
in the Kingston Penitentiary. 

(Recommended by Dist. Insp. Cousans) . 

POLICE ORDER NO. 1, Feb. 12. 1942 . 

Sergt. R. P. Labelle, Ottawa Detachment and 

Provincial Constable J. E. Soubliere, Rockland Detachment. 

In connection with the arrests of German Doucett and Edmond 
Paquette, members of the R.C.A.F., Uplands Airport, Ottawa charged 
with the murder of Charles G. Walton of Ottawa, Ont. 

The accused were tried separately in the Supreme Court, Hull, 
Quebec, during the month of January and both Doucett and Paquette 
were sentenced to 20 years imprisonment in the St. Vincent de Paul 
Penitentiary on 27 January 1942. 

(Recommended by District Inspector T. W. Cousans) 

POLICE ORDER NO. 2, March 25. 1942 . 

Provincial Constable J. E. Soubliere, Rockland Detachment. 

In connection with the arrest and conviction of Gabriel Marcoux, 
Doland Laberge , and Geo. Henry Lefaivre on charges of Breaking, 
Entering & Theft and escaping from custody. 

Marcoux, Laberge & Lefaivre were sentenced to 5 years in Kingston j 
Penitentiary on the charge of Breaking Gaol Sec. 187 C. Code and to 
seven years in the same institution on the charges of Breaking, 
Entering & Theft. 

(Recommended by District Inspector Cousans) . 

POLICE ORDER NO. 9, August 26 , 1943. 

Provincial Constable J. E. Soubliere, No. 9 D.H.Q. Perth and 
Provincial Constable A. Macleod, Prescott Detachment. 

In connection with the arrest and conviction of Carl Beamish 
of Jasper, Ont., on charges of Gross Indecency. 

On July 6.1943 Beamish appeared before Magistrate G. A. 
Wright at Bro ckville and sentenced to 3 years in the Kingston 
Penitentiary with ten strokes of the strap. (Recommended by 
District Inspector T. W. Cousans). 

POLICE ORDER NO. 7, August 3. 1944 . 

Provincial Constable J. E. Soubliere, No. $ D.H.Q. , Belleville. 

In connection with the arrest of Raymond Wood, Stanley 
Archer, et al on numerous charges of Breaking, Entering & Theft 
at Belleville & vicinity. 

As a result four of the accused were sentenced to lengthy 
terms in the penitentiary and others to various terms in the 

(Recommended by District Inspector H. Storey). 

POLICE ORDER NO. 7, July 9, 1945. 

Provincial Constables J.E. Keays, E. Bowen & G. Siple, 
#3 D.H.Q. Belleville. 

In connection with the arrest and conviction of Sylvanus 
Hagerman on a charge of Arson in the Township of Rawdon, County 
of Hastings. 

On June 7, 1945 Hagerman appeared before Magistrate T. Y. 
Wills at Belleville on this charge and sentenced to 3 years in 
Kingston Penitentiary. 

(Recommended by District Inspector H. Thompson). 

POLICE ORDER N O . 2. Marc h 3, 1947. 

Provincial Constable J. E. Keays, #3 D.H.Q., Belleville and 
Provincial Constable S. itf. Palmateer, Bancroft Detachment. 

In connection with the arrest of Ralph Turner, George 
Urbach, William and George Boyd, regarding indecent assault on 
males at Coe Hill, Ont. 

As a result Turner was sentenced to 2 years in Kingston 
Penitentiary, Urback to 3 months in the County Gaol and William 
& Geo. Boyd declared mentally unfit to stand trial. 

(Recommended by District Inspector Page). 

POLI CE ORDER NO. 1, Janua ry 1$, 1943 . 

Provincial Constables J.E. Keays and G.R. Purdy, #9 D.H.Q. 


In connection with the arrest and conviction of James 
Maitland @ Edward R. Page, West Vancouver, on charges of shop- 
breaking, entering & theft, and escape from custody. 

As a result Maitland was sentenced to six years in Kingston 

(Recommended by District Inspector W. A. Page). 

POLICE O RDER NO. 7. August 12, 194$. 

Sergeant S. F. Hartleib, Corporal S. Ervine, Provincial 

Constables H. A. Caldwell and J. E. Keays, #9 D.H.Q. 


In connection with the arrest and conviction of Mickey 
Metrunitz, Harry T Laski, and Peter Carey on a charge of Break- 
ing & Entering & Theft from Brewers warehousing Co. at Picton 
on April 26, 1943. 

The accused appeared before His Honour Judge W. Lane at 
Picton on the 10th June 1943 and Metrunitz sentenced to 4 years 
in Kingston Penitentiary, O'Laski to 3 years in the same in- 

stitution and Carey to one year definite and six months 
indefinite in Guelph Reformatory. 

(Recommended by District Inspector W. A. Page.) 

^ IfaP 




Keays, John E. 10 

By Mr. Robb 1141 

By Mr, Donnan 1533 

Stringer, James Allan, 

By Mr. Hope 1633 

By Mr. Keays 1633 

By Mr. Robb 1763 

Cousans, Thomas Williams, 

By Mr. Hope 1732 

By Mr. Keays 1734 

By Mr. Robb 1912 

By Mr. Keays 1929 

Wonnacott, Ralph William, 

By Mr. Keays 1954 

By Mr. Hope 1956 

By Mr. Robb 1962 

By Mr. Keays 1971 

By Mr. Robb 2097 

By Mr. Keays 2101 

Smith, George Sidney, 

By Mr. Hope 2116 

By Mr. Keays 2130 

Patterson, George Jackson, 

By Mr. Hope 2193 

By Mr. Keays 2193 

By Mr. Robb 2203 

Kennedy, Ward H. , 

By Mr. Hope 2216 

By Mr. Keays 2224 

By Mr. Robb 2313 

By Mr. Keays 2322 

Bourgeois, Emile, 

By Mr. Hope 2326 

Purdy, Gerald Re id, 

By Mr. Hope 2334 

By Mr. Keays 2335 

By Mr. Robb 2463 

By Mr. Keays 2500 

Ervine, Samuel, 

By Mr. Hope 2514 

By Mr. Keays 2516 

Wright, Robert J., 

By Mr. Hope 2573 

By Mr. Keays 2576 

By Mr. Robb 2590 

By Mr. Keays 2592 


Ervine, Samuel, Recalled, 

Lane, His Honour Judge W.S., 



Vandewater, Roscoe W. G. , 

Bateraan, Burton B. , 

Sine, Malcolm H. , 

Phillips, Harold G. L. , 

Doyle, Everett T. , 

Donnan, Bryson C., 

Moss, Arthur, 

Hartleib, Ervine F. , 
Keays, John E., Recalled, 


By Mr. Keays 2594 

By Mr. Keays (recalled) 2369 

Mr. Hope 2323 

Mr. Robb 2329 

Mr. Donnan 2332 

Mr. Keays 2333 

By Mr. Hope 2366 

By Mr. Keays 2363 

By Mr. Robb 2990 

By Mr. Hope 3003 

By Mr. Keays 3006A 

By Mr. Robb 3027 

By Mr. Keays 3030 

By Mr. Hope 3032 

By Mr. Keays 3043 

By Mr. Robb 3056 

By Mr. Keays 3061 

By Mr. Hope 3063 

By Mr. Keays 3071 

By Mr. Robb 3075 

By Mr. Keays 3077 

By Mr. Hope 3073 

By Mr. Keays 3096 

By Mr. Robb 3190 

By Mr. Keays 3210 

By Mr. Robb 3226 

By Mr. Hope 3226 

By Mr. Keays 3255 

By Mr. Robb 3344 

By Mr. Keays 3359 

By Mr. Hope 3372 

By Mr. Keays 3373 

By Mr. Hope 3330 

By Mr. Keays 3413 

By Mr. Robb 3511 

By Mr. Keays 3521 

By Mr. Keays 3 524 

By Mr. Hope 3544 


Hartleib, Ervine F. , Recalled, 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 

Moss, Arthur, Recalled, 
Richmond, James Wm. , 

Siple, Charles Edward, 

Palmateer, Stanley W. , 

Page, William Arthur, 

Woods, LeRoy, 

Woods, Mrs. Olive June, 

Driscoll, James Benedict, 

Hayes, John Clair, 

By Mr. 

By Mr. 
By Mr, 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 

Siple, Charles Edward, Recalled, 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 
By Mr. 


Keays 3552 

Robb 3569 

Keays 364O 

Keays 365O 

Hope 3654 

Keays 3655 

Robb 3665 

Keays 3633 

Hope 3636 

Keays 3637 

Robb 3711 

Keays 3740 

Hope 3743 

Robb 3743 

Donnan 3753 

Keays 3765 

Robb 3732 

Hope 3732A 

Keays 3733 

Robb 3392 

Hope 3903 

Robb 3903 

Keays 3912 

Hope 3922 

Robb 3922 

Keays 3922 

Hope 3925 

Keays 3943 

Robb 3964 

Keays 3972 

Robb 3975 

Hope 3976 

Keays 3976 

Keays 3991 

Robb 3996 

Donnan 4002 

Keays 4003 


Wilson, James David, 

Harman, Arthur, 















Donnan, Bryson C, Recalled, 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 

McNeill, Edwin Victor, 

Monahan, Gavin A. 

Stewart, Dr. Gordon A., 

Bowen, Elmer Edomond, 

Borland, Oliver E. , 

Ervine, Samuel, Recalled, 

Driscoll, James B. , Recalled, 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 



















































Trimble, Thomas H. , 

By Mr. 
By Mr. 

Keays 4004 

Robb 4013 

Keays 4021 

Keays 4022 

Robb 4030 

Keays 4034 

Hope 403 5 

Hope 4036 

Keays 4134 

Hope 4193 

Robb 4193 

Keays 4201 

Robb 4212 

Hope 4214 

Robb 4215 

Keays 421§ 

Donnan , 424S 

Robb 4255 

Keays 4259 

Hope 4260 

Robb 4260 

Keays 4263 

Robb 4264 

Keays 4265 

Hope 4266 

Robb 4266A 

Keays 4275 

Donnan 4306 

Robb 4310 

Keays 4311 

Hope 4312 

Keays 4315 

Hope 4337 

Keays 4339 

Robb 4344 

Keays 4344 

Hope 4347 

Keays 4352 

Commissioner Page 
Stringer, William Holden, 

By Mr. Hope 4373 

By Mr. Keays 4432 

Airey, Christopher, F. , 

By Mr. Hope 4622 

By Mr. Keays 4629 

By Mr. Robb 4634 

By Mr. Keays 463 5 

Franks, Wilfred Joseph, 

By Mr. Hope 4636 

By Mr. Robb 4650 

By Mr. Keays 4652 

By Mr. Robb 4705 

By Mr. Keays 4706 

Hartleib, Ervine F. Recalled, 

By Mr. Hope 4714 

By Mr. Keays 4714 

Siple, Charles E. Recalled, 

By Mr. Hope 4715 

By Mr. Keays 4715 

By Mr. Robb 4716 

By Mr. Keays 4717 

Hartleib, Ervine F. Recalled, 

By Mr. Keays 4713 

By Mr. Robb 4726 

Richmond, James Wm. Recalled, 

By Mr. Keays 4723 

By Mr. Robb 4739 

Badgley, John Beresford, 

By Mr. Hope 4740 

By Mr. Keays 4740 

Keays, Mrs. Edith, 

By Mr. Keays 4763 

By Mr. Robb 4773 

Badgley, Mrs. Elizabeth, 

By Mr. Keays 4731 

Keays, John E., Recalled, (in reply) 4735